Forte224 wrote:So who are you complaining about? Several of this forum's most consistent posters like (apologies for name dropping but at least it's in a good way) ABED, Robo4900, Kunzait83, Gaffer Tape, etc. etc. all go into incredible detail with their posts. Who are these people that are dropping these complaints you speak of? I don't see them anywhere.
Execution matters 100%. You can't objectively say which is executed better, that goes without saying, but you CAN have a rational discussion about which show executed things better. But you don't seem to want to have that discussion. You just want to be as shallow as possible and say "Well Super may have had these 2 things but DB had these 3 things so you can't complain". That's a shallow, boring, rigid discussion.
And how in the WORLD can you say people give the original series a pass? The original series gets TORN. TO. SHREDS. on this forum. I have seen people (on a regular basis) go into incredible detail on the slow pacing (specifically of Z), I've seen people call the Red Ribbon, Cell, Boo, and sometimes even the Freeza arcs utter trash, I've seen people tear apart the awful filler episodes. Where are you finding these people that seem to look at the original's flaws and go "Meh, they're bad but I don't care"? I just don't see them. All I see are people that go into great detail on the flaws of the original, yet still love it due to the things it does right, and yet hate Super because they feel it executes its flaws even worse. Which is fine. The opposite is fine too. Anything in-between is also fine. But being shallow and not wanting to have any discussion and basically closing your ears off to any and all criticism, and boiling things down to a rigid, technical judgement of each series based on the number of times they do things is the exact opposite of what this site is about. You have plenty of other options if that's what you want.
I have no problem with the fact that Super gets criticism. I also criticize myself, so I am the last to say that it can not.
However, what I often find with some critics is the statement 'you may find Super good, which is nice for you, that does not change the fact that this objective is a bad show'.
First and foremost: it is total nonsense to objectively determine that a show is bad or good. Different opinions are equal, an expert may perceive more inconsistencies, but that does not mean that his opinion is worth more than another.
An anime is found good or bad. But is not good or bad 'an sich'. People who postulate this position, therefore, assume a premeditation that fits their stall. They start from a predetermined reason to say why something is not right. While they, to my liking, could also simply say why they do not like something. That is a subtle but big difference in the defended position that is assumed.
Whenever I see that statement appear, I can hardly say that this does not lead to suspicion.
If you then actually analyze what these people use as arguments, you often see a lot of repetition of things that are often mentioned, which I mentioned in a previous post.
It is often stated the same 'flaws' return. That is indeed true. And perhaps more at Super than at DBZ. But it is also a fact that with a lot of long-term fiction-franchises inconsistencies and retcons arise at a given moment. It is inevitable because the amount of information that is intertwined becomes almost unclear.
Super has the 'disadvantage' that the universe is getting bigger and the power levels are reaching outside astronomical values. The fact that Super had a different director for every episode did not do any good to keep that overview. With which, for the sake of clarity, I do not want to compensate for things, but you have to take that context into account if you want to give 'constructive criticism'.
With constructive criticism, I mean: you can identify these deviations and form an opinion about them, for which you do not like a show for yourself for that reason. That is perfectly rational. Provided you know that and also postpone it to others in the form 'It is my feeling or opinion that ...' In this way you criticize with RESPECT for other opinions and also for the makers of the series. Because every anime series, however 'bad' it may be found, has accumulated liters of blood, sweat and tears.
If, however, you link this to the statement 'Super is objectively bad' and that underpins these arguments, it is no longer rational in my view. It is deliberately using 'flaws' where every long-running fiction franchise suffers to a greater or lesser degree in order to substantiate its own sense or agenda.
)